Law enforcement personnel frequently encounter hostiles in the field. The traditional method of engagement is through the application or threat of application of deadly force, including the use of firearms and the execution of standard firing techniques. Traditional firearms, however, present limited options for the swift incapacitation or neutralization of a hostile. Unless the hostile is hit directly in the brain or the spinal cord, the hostile can remain effective until blood loss or cardiac failure leads to anoxia and loss of consciousness. To compensate for the absence of a one-shot incapacitating hit, most systems of combat shooting teach targeting a “center of mass” approach that relies on multiple hits to neutralize the hostile party. This often leads to medically irreparable trauma and death for the hostile party. One well publicized instance in New York saw an innocent individual shot 43 times by the police while reaching for his wallet. This tragedy illustrates a need for munitions which provide target incapacitation with a single hit.
Further illustration of shortcomings of traditional firearms as a neutralizing means can be appreciated in hostage situations or when hostiles are embedded amidst a crowd of innocent bystanders. In such cases, the danger of collateral damage and a possibility of unintended casualties limits use of traditional firearms and standard center-of-mass combat shooting. The risk of hitting unintended bystanders increases with the number of rounds fired at the intended target. In response, modern firearm ammunitions have been increasingly customized to provide projectiles with enhanced lethality due to increased wound cavity size or tissue damage, causing a more rapid loss of consciousness and motor function. This enhanced lethality would seemingly require less rounds to be fired into the target for incapacitation. However enhanced, these custom projectiles may still require a crucial amount of time for the target to succumb from resulting wounds. This lag in efficacy presents an unacceptable window for hostiles to further antagonize victims and complicate resolution of perilous encounters. There remains a need for accurate and immediate incapacitation or neutralization of suspects hidden among groups of innocent bystanders while avoiding inadvertent lethal consequences.
Moreover, traditional firearms do not address a law enforcement policy of tailoring a force response to a level of threat presented. Law enforcement personnel require a spectrum of force alternatives to dispatch a continuum of levels of threat. While use of deadly force is sometimes desirable, such action does not always represent a proportional response. Application of deadly force in instances where only neutralizing force is required exceeds the desired momentary incapacitation which would allow personnel to secure a hostile. Ideally, law enforcement field responses would be tailored to the level of threat presented. There remains a need for non-lethal devices that allow responses in proportion to the level of threat presented.
In particular, law enforcement personnel are often called upon to manage and control large groups of individuals who may be engaged in unlawful assemblies or other breaches of the peace. Various devices and methods have been conceived that provide large surface areas (bean bags) or soft materials (rubber bullets) which are designed to disperse and discourage rioting populations. The drawbacks and deficiencies of these methods have been well documented. The beanbags can be inaccurate and may cause fractures and joint damage. Rubber bullets have been shown in Israel to kill the targeted individuals if hit in the head at close range. In Oakland, Calif., the firing of wooden dowels, rubber bullets, and stinger grenades to disperse a riotous political assembly led to the wounding of dozens of protesters. See Brenda Payton, Police Chief Word In Over His Head, Apr. 11, 2003, Oakland Tribune. The use of brutal, non-lethal force in the Oakland engagement sparked further civic outrage, resulting in the impaneling of a special task force to investigate allegations of police impropriety. These incidents illustrate a continuing need for a rapid, reliable, safe one-shot incapacitation of targets.
One attempt to provide a force alternative to standard firearms is shown in U.S. Pat. No. 5,962,806 (hereinafter '806 patent) issued to Coakley et al. for Non-Lethal Projectile for Delivering an Electric Shock to a Living Target. Coakley describes a projectile carrying an electric circuit which uses a battery to generate an electric shock that is applied to a target through a plurality of electrodes. Coakley further discloses an attachment means intended to secure the projectile to the target upon impact. Although the teaching of Coakley may be viewed as an improvement over the prior art cited therein, including the devices commonly referred to as the “stun gun” and the “tazer”, the device of the '806 patent requires complex internal circuitry and a battery power source. To house the necessary battery and circuitry, Coakley teaches a bulky projectile having substantial frontal area, which minimizes its accurate delivery. Furthermore, the battery-powered projectile necessitates a voltage indicator on the device to determine if the power source is still viable. The device also requires an adhesive or other material to insure long-term contact while delivering the electrical charge. The mass of the device requires substantial propellant for launch which is likely to produce large recoil when the device is fired, further complicating precision delivery to target. There is a need for an incapacitating method that does not rely on internal battery power for charge generation, and further that is small enough to be delivered with the accuracy of a standard firearm round.
Additionally, available systems require active engagement of mechanical elements to arm the projectile or to energize a circuit upon firing or impact, e.g., a momentum switch actuated by an arming pin. To arm such a projectile, a user must consciously decide to charge the projectile's circuitry by releasing the arming pin which otherwise electrically disconnects a battery power source from the remainder of an electric circuit. Once the projectile is so armed, a momentum switch is free to toggle upon impact to activate a charging circuit. Having an arming sequence in addition to a firing maneuver unnecessarily complicates rapid target incapacitation. Requiring an operator to first arm an incapacitating firing projectile introduces human processing error to a tension-filled execution sequence where split seconds may prove crucial. Thus there remains a need for a simple method of incapacitating a target that eliminates or minimizes reliance on moving parts, and that is not predicated on fallible human action to facilitate accurate effective delivery.
Piezoelectric (hereinafter “PZ”) materials provide an alternative to batteries as reliable, portable sources of voltage. Piezoelectricity is a property of certain classes of crystalline materials including natural crystals of Quartz, Rochelle Salt and Tourmaline plus manufactured ceramics such as Barium Titanate and Lead Zirconate Titanates. PZ materials convert mechanical stresses to electrical voltages and electrical voltages to mechanical stresses. Although PZ materials have been known for many years, advances in the state of the art have led to a progression of multiple materials, both natural and manmade, that exhibit increasing PZ potentials.
PZ materials are employed in such common devices as spark igniters for disposable lighters, to Stove Top igniters, Blasting Cap detonators and other devices which require short duration, high intensity sparks. PZ materials also convert electrical energy to sound and mechanical values, as found in stereo and sonar systems. Resulting electrical voltages from activated PZ materials range from 25,000 volts in a sparking lighter, to over 250,000 volts in a destructive crush mode system. In contrast, battery-operated commercial stun guns designed to provide rapid incapacitation of targets typically generate voltages in the range of 25,000 to 75,000 volts. PZ materials exist as a substitute for battery-derived electrical charge production. In addition, PZ are capable of being molded into a variety of desired shapes. Thus, PZ materials can be characterized as providing a broad effective range of voltages to be tailored toward specific lethal or non-lethal objectives.